Fetch recent messages from a Kafka topic to inspect current data.
Fetch the most recent messages from a topic.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| topic | Yes | Kafka topic name. | |
| max_results | No | ||
| partition_id | No | Partition to read from, or -1 for all partitions. |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only restates the operation without explaining ordering, whether it reads from the end of the topic, error behavior, or what happens with the default partition and max_results settings. The agent is left to infer even basic read semantics.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is appropriately concise, though the brevity comes at the cost of missing semantic context that the other dimensions penalize.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Even with an output schema and mostly described parameters, the tool lacks essential context: what 'latest' means in Kafka terms, how it relates to the sibling fetch tools, and any behavioral caveats. The description alone is not enough for an agent to confidently distinguish this from fetch_by_time or fetch_by_offset.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 67%, covering topic and partition_id, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-level information beyond the schema, and max_results lacks a schema description, but its default/min/max constraints and the overall tool description provide minimal context.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description uses a specific verb ('Fetch') and resource ('the most recent messages from a topic'), making the primary action clear. It distinguishes from siblings like list_topics and describe_topic, though 'most recent' is slightly ambiguous about whether it means latest by offset or time relative to fetch_by_time and fetch_by_offset.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The phrase 'most recent messages' implies the intended context: use this when you want the newest messages rather than a historical range or topic metadata. However, it gives no explicit guidance on when to prefer fetch_by_time, fetch_by_offset, or search_messages instead, and does not mention any exclusions or prerequisites.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.